Establishing a library district sounds like a reasonable solution to the deadlock that’s been taking place between the appointed library board and the City Council. It would solve a couple of problems: (1) it would make the library board directly accountable to the voters, instead of being appointed by the Mayor; and (2) it would require that a referendum be passed by the voters before they would be able to raise their tax rate, which would keep the board fiscally conservative and force them to make a compelling case to the public before raising taxes.

But establishing a library district would also freeze the district’s boundaries at their current position, so library services would not automatically be extended when the city annexes more land. Territory annexed to the city could also be annexed to the library district if the residents there so desire, or they could go without library service. The library director sees this as a downside, but doesn’t elaborate as to why this would be a bad thing.

One argument could be made that the library district wouldn’t be automatically capturing the new tax revenue from the northern growth; but on the other hand, they wouldn’t have to provide services to them either, so it seems like a wash to me. More importantly, though, it’s bad at a more basic and philosophical level: The city shouldn’t be divided into “haves” and “have nots” where library services are concerned. We already have a city divided into three school districts (Peoria, Dunlap, Limestone), and we’ve seen how inequitably those services are delivered to city residents as a result. There’s no sense in creating the same kinds of problems with our library system.

I’m still hopeful that the library board and city council will reach a compromise that will update and modernize the library system at a cost that is reasonable and acceptable to all parties. They can consult on how they can do it through the Metro District.